[SOLVED] I need a new GPU, is 6GB VRAM enough?

[RacAtat007]

I still have the HD7950 from my original build so I'm in need of a new GPU but I haven't been paying close attention to GPUs for a while. I'm looking at the 1660TI possibly but idk if 6GB VRAM is good enough to play modern/future games. I play at 1080 but will eventually be stepping up the res. Will the 8GB 590 hold up longer because of more VRAM? I would like to stay around $300 but could spend more if there was a much better option for a little more. Any thoughts?

 

[Eph3mera]

I think 6GB is more than enough for now.
The 1660 is fine, you better take a look at your CPU and ram, or else they might bottleneck with your 1660.

 

[mr91]

What games do you play?

6 GB should be good for most games @ 1080p and many games at 1440p.

 

[LordofAllClouds]

I strongly disagree. I'm not saying that 6GB is going to prohibit you but if you expect to get 2-3 years out of your card then it I would not buy any card with less than 8GB. I heard the same story back when I bought my 4GB model of the 760GTX new, over the 2GB -- that 2GB was plenty -- and less than a year later I was taking advantage of that extra VRAM.

 

[mr91]

In 2 - 3 years the OP might want to upgrade however by lowering texture quality the games will still be playable.

The more VRAM the better a 1070 or a used 1080 ti would last longer.

 

[RacAtat007]

What games do you play?

6 GB should be good for most games @ 1080p and many games at 1440p.

I am all over the place with games I play. I go from Esports titles that run easily to new AAA stuff so I wanted something that can run most newer titles at high settings for a while to come. I have gotten like 6 years out of my HD 7950 3GB but I'm guessing those days are over?

What about a 590 or Vega GPU?

 

[xSamaru]

I personally am waiting for Navi gpu´s from AMD or price crash for rtx 2080 hence why im running 9700k + 290x lol. I was looking at RTX 2060 and while its a great card, im just not buying that 6GB VRAM. Especially with new generation of consoles coming out that will have 8 core cpus and powerful gpus..naaa

 

[mr91]

I am all over the place with games I play. I go from Esports titles that run easily to new AAA stuff so I wanted something that can run most newer titles at high settings for a while to come. I have gotten like 6 years out of my HD 7950 3GB but I'm guessing those days are over?

What about a 590 or Vega GPU?

I haven't tested the new AMD cards however 590 is significantly slower than 1660 ti and Vega 56 is more money based on a bit of research.

2060, 1070, 1070 ti or 1080 would also be good options that would last longer than the 1660 ti however i"m sure you would enjoy the 1660 ti.

I have the 1060 on my laptop and I'm able to play some AAA titles such as the Witcher 3, Nier Automata and Crysis 3 on ultra settings.

Some games like Call of Duty black ops 4 use more that 8GB of Vram @ 1440p if settings are maxed out. Shadow of Mordor uses 6 GB of VRAM @ 1080p however settings can be lowered and the game still looks good.

Memory compression is better on Turing than Pascal so the cards use less memory, which gives a bit of an edge to the 1660 ti and other current gen cards...

the article below has more information.


https://www.anandtech.com/show/13282/nvidia-turing-architecture-deep-dive/8



What is your max budget.

 

[RacAtat007]

I haven't tested the new AMD cards however 590 is significantly slower than 1660 ti and Vega 56 is more money based on a bit of research.

2060, 1070, 1070 ti or 1080 would also be good options that would last longer than the 1660 ti however i"m sure you would enjoy the 1660 ti.

I have the 1060 on my laptop and I'm able to play some AAA titles such as the Witcher 3, Nier Automata and Crysis 3 on ultra settings.

Some games like Call of Duty black ops 4 use more that 8GB of Vram @ 1440p if settings are maxed out. Shadow of Mordor uses 6 GB of VRAM @ 1080p however settings can be lowered and the game still looks good.

Memory compression is better on Turing than Pascal so the cards use less memory, which gives a bit of an edge to the 1660 ti and other current gen cards...

the article below has more information.


https://www.anandtech.com/show/13282/nvidia-turing-architecture-deep-dive/8



What is your max budget.

Thank you for the response and article

I don't really have a max budget but the more I spend the longer the wife makes me sleep on the couch so I would like to stay around $300 ideally. If there is a card that gets double the performance for another $100-$200 I would highly consider it but from what I've seen that doesn't exist. I thought I heard about some 12GB GPUs from AMD a while ago?

 

[uppercut4u]

Yes, 6GB memory is enough but its all about the GPU

 

[mjbn1977]

as long you don't plan to play 4k you will be good at least for the next 2 years. I play everything on Ultra in 1440p and haven't found a current game that uses more than 6GB. Most games sit between 3.5 and 5GB

 

[mjbn1977]

I personally am waiting for Navi gpu´s from AMD or price crash for rtx 2080 hence why im running 9700k + 290x lol. I was looking at RTX 2060 and while its a great card, im just not buying that 6GB VRAM. Especially with new generation of consoles coming out that will have 8 core cpus and powerful gpus..naaa

You know that consoles share RAM and VRAM. So, even if the new consoles using 16GB of Vram, so it will be comparable to a 8GB Ram/ 8GB vram computer. You also aware that consoles are already using 8 cores for a very very long time. Current generation consoles are using 8 cores. The new consoles most like will have 8core/16T ryzen processer which will clocked much lower what is usually possible on a PC (due price and thermal restrictions of a living room console). By the way. There will be no new generation consoles before Fall 2020. But there will be a new old generation Xbox possibly this year, but that will be probably just an Xbox One without optical drive.

6GB vram GDDR6 for 1080 and 1440p is super plenty. even when the new consoles arrive. 8GB and more you only need if you want to use 4k. And according to Gamers Nexus there is no game that needs more than 8GB in 4k at this time.

 

[mdd1963]

6 GB of VRAM is more than enough for 1080P...

 

[richk1853]

For the price of a 1660ti you could get a used 1070ti that will perform slightly better and have have 2gb extra VRAM, albeit GDDR5 instead of GDDR6.

 

[mr91]

Thank you for the response and article

I don't really have a max budget but the more I spend the longer the wife makes me sleep on the couch so I would like to stay around $300 ideally. If there is a card that gets double the performance for another $100-$200 I would highly consider it but from what I've seen that doesn't exist. I thought I heard about some 12GB GPUs from AMD a while ago?

You're Welcome! A used 1080 ti would give you a massive performance increase, more VRAM and would last for a lot longer.

If you can find a 1070 ti, 1080 or even a 1070 for really cheap on the used market than you should consider it.

I think the price is about 500 USD for a 1080 ti on the used market however buying used has some risks. AMD released the Radeon 7 with 16 GB of HBM 2 however they are hard to find and the price of a 2080.

 

[spentshells]

I have to agree, get more ram for 300 USD you'd be far better off buying a used card from a reputable seller on eBay. 240 for a used 1070 is a better buy than the 1660 ti at 300, it performs slightly better and has a larger frame buffer. Thats my next stop, I haven't been gaming the last year at all
My 670PE cut it for fallout 4 the last game I played but for years having to avoid hi red textures really is a bummer.

 

[xDxLxSx]

RacAtata not trying to hijack. Following. Im in a similar situation with a slightly older GPU (5770 w/ 1GB).
I notice someone saying 2-3 years of usage. A little disheartening for sure.
Brushing up on gfx the last day or so. Read the article mentioned on Anandtech ... lots of numbers lots of test. Sad to say my eyes glazed.

But this "2060, 1070, 1070 ti or 1080 would also be good options that would last longer than the 1660 ti however i"m sure you would enjoy the 1660 ti."

The 2060 and 1660 are the newer Turing architectures right? Wouldn't they in general (I'm an old fart I just want to plug stuff up and it work) have a longer lifespan with drivers and developers? ... I notice on the Hierarchy page (what is this nonsense! what happened to the old one) the 2060 uses the TU106 while the 1660 uses TU116? I understand the price/performance is based on more cores in the 2060 but wouldnt the 116 be newer?

Much like RacAtata I was looking at the 580 ($225 ish), didnt see much of a jump for price for the 590 but saw the 1660 ($280 ish) looked like a viable option. I've read that prices are at a current low with a possible drop pushing in to the summer. Would you all in your experience expect to see the 2060 drop near the $300 mark in say the next 60-90 days?

Also ... someone mentioned check your RAM. RacAtata has 16GB. Have newer games truly started pushing the need for higher?! I thought I was being smart when I threw 16GB at my current machine.

Answers ... yes stuck with 1080 gaming. $$$ is tight. Only 4k option is the LR TV so not an option in the foreseeable future. Yes Im aware my CPU/Mobo are hindrances. I leap frog parts.

 

[RacAtat007]

You're Welcome! A used 1080 ti would give you a massive performance increase, more VRAM and would last for a lot longer.

If you can find a 1070 ti, 1080 or even a 1070 for really cheap on the used market than you should consider it.

I think the price is about 500 USD for a 1080 ti on the used market however buying used has some risks. AMD released the Radeon 7 with 16 GB of HBM 2 however they are hard to find and the price of a 2080.

I've looked at this option but I'm a little hesitant to buy used. There are 1070s new on Amazon for around $350 so maybe that's what I'll do but I gotta do some research first. I have always had an AMD GPU so trying to figure out the green side now is a little confusing, especially with their naming scheme. I was considering a 2060 but from what I've read it's kind of a pointless card, at least for now. It seems like the 2060 isn't powerful enough to use ray tracing so the price bump isn't worth it unless they optimize ray tracing a lot in the future

 

[mr91]

Ray Tracing is Amazing for Metro Exodus however they are still working on DLSS. Possibly later the 2060 will shine. I don't use DLSS yet because it's still blurry however it has improved since day one.

I suggest you get the 1070 new for $350, it's faster than the 590 and around the speed of a Vega 56 Depending on the game. If you can find a Vega 56 new for 350 than you can consider it too.

Nvidia cards are generally more power efficient and have better drivers however if you are comfortable with AMD the Vega 56 would be your best bet in my opinion.



https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-vs-AMD-RX-Vega-56/3609vs3938

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-vs-AMD-RX-590/3609vs4033

 

[RobCrezz]

I strongly disagree. I'm not saying that 6GB is going to prohibit you but if you expect to get 2-3 years out of your card then it I would not buy any card with less than 8GB. I heard the same story back when I bought my 4GB model of the 760GTX new, over the 2GB -- that 2GB was plenty -- and less than a year later I was taking advantage of that extra VRAM.

But by the time 4gb was needed the performance of the 760 was not enough to really use that anyway, so the advice at the time was right.

 

[LordofAllClouds]

But by the time 4gb was needed the performance of the 760 was not enough to really use that anyway, so the advice at the time was right.

As I said in my original post that you quoted -- less than a year later I was taking advantage of the extra VRAM - that means on my 760GTX.

 

[RobCrezz]

As I said in my original post that you quoted -- less than a year later I was taking advantage of the extra VRAM - that means on my 760GTX.

760 doesnt have the performance for it to make any difference though, so it was a waste.

 

[sizzling]

As I said in my original post that you quoted -- less than a year later I was taking advantage of the extra VRAM - that means on my 760GTX.

The problem with monitoring vram usage is just because a card uses X amount of vram does not mean it needs it. Newer cards are also more efficient with vram usage. I have an old 780 3gb which in some games needs settings dropped to medium due to vram limitation. However a 1060 3gb can run much higher settings without issues.

 

[LordofAllClouds]

Sure -- I'm not saying that a newer card with less VRAM won't outperform an older card with more. I'm saying that I played games not long after where my 760GTX was using over 3GB of VRAM and performing well. If I had gone with the 2GB model I would be having issues. To say that it is a waste is foolish because even if you benchmark more modern games on these old cards you will see a difference in how far you can go settings wise with a 2GB vs 4GB model.

It's disappointing that even with the savings of going back to DDR5 on the 1660, nVidia still chose to only go with 6GB instead of 8GB. You shouldn't have to pay 550$+ to get a new card with 8GB in 2019. Of course, you don't... since you can go with an AMD RX card but legacy support with older games is really important to me and AMD cards don't play nice with even early some Windows 7 games. Though, honestly, I can't attest to how well Pascal and Turing work with older games... but I imagine their drivers are pretty solid.